Huw Edwards

[Aquarius1234]

To think he shouldn't have been paid in full while off long term. As its more like being self employed.
But mainly cos it was 475k upwards of our TV licence money!
Another example is when a famous radio presenter s decide to go off for an extended break to film another show or something. Surely they don't get normal pay when they have extra weeks off not on air!!

He was suspended awaiting review, he could well have been found not guilty so on that basis he should have been paid imo.

Suspended for longer than at work is mad.

It wasn’t while he went off to work elsewhere, it was while he was under a review, and they were not prejudging the outcome.

In typical jobs, you will get paid leave. He was under medical care for a while and putting aside what has now come out, people are entitled to sick leave. As for ‘working for another show’, they’re still employees of the BBC and production companies can overlap.

Well he will probably be going to jail now.

We should avoid speculation as it will get the thread deleted.

He has now ruined his life so I don't suppose any amount of money will help .

They are following procedure. Whether you think it is right is irrelevant.

BBC shouldn't pay the same amount when a presenter is having a long holiday or doing another gig for example 2 / 3 months.
BBC news presenters earn too much anyway.

And his name is Edwards

What if it was for 2/ 3 years. You don't mind that it's 3 million.

It doesn't matter how much it is, it's procedure. Same for everyone I would hope. Including you.

Didn't mind having it for 95% of his BBC life tho.
Probably was issues 20 years ago.
So really only got stopped with a couple more years to go.

what if? what if? what if?

Rich people are allowed due process as well.

I think it does matter how much it is as its a crazy high level of money. Our money .
Should be certain rules. As I think we would all survive on half of say 500k while suspended... 🙄
We pay for it.

It's normal to be paid in full while suspended under investigation, because until the investigation is concluded it hasn't been established that someone has done anything wrong. This is how things work in the interests of fairness. It's the organisation's HR policy being applied, just as it would apply to any other BBC employee. The employee's salary is irrelevant.

It's just Employment law ,suspension is supposed to be neutral to protect both the employer and employee
Lucy Letby will have received full pay whilst she was suspended too.

Well it’s the BBC - remember Saville?

Yes what annoys people most is these people are generally always found out ( out in the open) when they are nearly or retired anyway.

Often suspensions can go on for long periods of time in big organisations .

I saw it rendered as Edward's with an apostrophe in another thread!

I saw a plaque at Cardiff Castle the other day saying he had helped open the Cultural Centre and café. I guess that might come down if (IF) he's found guilty.

His trial only starts today. Innocent until proved guilty.

But that ‘gig’ will be deemed either under a BBC production or they will still be an employee of the BBC but have been granted leave that would be deemed appropriate/beneficial to them as a company. And news presenters are not just figureheads - they’re journalists who have earned their place to lead often harrowing events. Can you imagine how awful it is for the current bbc news leaders not only have to research and report on another child sex abuse case, but be completely impartial despite it being about someone they probably cared deeply about before the news broke. An extremely difficult job.

Loads of tiny companies could not afford to pay in full. That's life. Esp if your a trades person working for someone.